the mission of the mechanical engineering department at

Annual Academic Program Assessment Report

Degree and Program: BS Mechanical Engineering

Department: Mechanical Engineering

Department Head: Jack Skinner

Academic Program Year Reviewed: 2019

Assessment Coordinator: Peter Lucon

Questions about report directed to: Peter Lucon

Report approved by: Trudnowski

Brief Program Narrative (1-2 paragraphs):

• Program Mission or general description of program

The mission of the Mechanical Engineering Department at Montana Tech is to:

• Provide students an education based in the fundamentals of engineering,

mathematics, and science in order to prepare graduates to enter and continue

the practice of Mechanical Engineering at the professional level. Our foci are

in Mechanical and Material systems, applications, and processing.

• Provide a comprehensive education to enable graduates to solve advanced

problems in the areas of Materials, Sensors and Actuators, Nanotechnology,

Control Systems, Thermal Fluids, and Welding.

• Maintain sustained research programs that contribute to solving critical

problems in the Design, Fabrication, and Characterization of Devices,

Processes, and Materials.

Note that the mission encompasses the entire department which offers both undergraduate and

graduate degrees. The foundation of the mission developed centered on fulfilling the

institution’s mission

• Context: changes/challenges throughout the year that impacted outcomes; rationale for any

changes throughout the year, etc.

The BSME program is new and currently going thru its first ABET accreditation. The content of

this report is based upon program evaluation conducted in 2018.

Section 1: Program Educational Objectives (What should alumni/graduates attain a few years after

graduation.) The purpose of this section is to demonstrate the process of reviewing the objectives to

ensure they remain consistent with the program mission and the constituents’ needs.

1. Please list your current Program Education Objectives.

The Program Educational Objectives of the BSME program are designed such that three

to five years after graduation, graduates from the program are prepared to:

1. Attain the successful practice of the Mechanical Engineering profession as

demonstrated by:

a. continued professional employment;

b. expanding career responsibility; and

c. job promotion.

2. Seek lifelong professional advancement through endeavors such as:

a. active membership in technical societies;

b. engineering volunteerism;

c. continued education; and

d. professional licensure.

3. Complete an advanced degree

2. Including this year, when were the last two academic years you reviewed Program Educational

Objectives?

2017-2018 and 2018-2019

3. Are your Program Educational Objectives available in the Montana Tech Catalog?

Yes

4. Please describe the process of reviewing the objectives periodically.

The PEO review committee described above periodically reviews the objectives. The next

review is scheduled for 2019-20. The review will focus on gaging if: 1) the PEOs remain

consistent with the program mission and the constituents’ needs; and 2) graduates are prepared

to achieve the PEOs.

5. List the stakeholders and describe how they are involved in reviewing Program Educational

Objectives.

The PEO review committee consisting of the ME Industrial Advisory Board, program faculty, and

BSME student representatives. These represent the stakeholders of the program: students,

faculty, alumni, and industry.

6. Describe the process by which Program Education Objectives can and will be modified.

The PEO review committee recommends changes to the faculty. The faculty vote on changes

and implement them.

Section 2: Student Outcomes Assessment (Student Outcomes are what students should know and be

able to do at the time of graduation. Assessment is an observation of whether students met the

intended outcome.)

1. Does your program have student learning outcomes that have been reviewed and approved by

program faculty?

Yes

2. Please list the student outcomes and the schedule for assessing each outcome. Each outcome

should be measured at least once every three years.

Students graduating from the BSME Program at Montana Tech will attain:

1. An ability to identify, formulate, and solve complex engineering problems by applying

principles of engineering, science, and mathematics.

2. An ability to apply engineering design to produce solutions that meet specified needs

with consideration of public health, safety, and welfare, as well as global, cultural, social,

environmental, and economic factors.

3. An ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences.

4. An ability to recognize ethical and professional responsibilities in engineering situations

and make informed judgments, which must consider the impact of engineering solutions

in global, economic, environmental, and societal context.

5. An ability to function effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership,

create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet

objectives.

6. An ability to develop and conduct appropriate experimentation, analyze and interpret

data, and use engineering judgment to draw conclusions.

7. An ability to develop and conduct appropriate experimentation, analyze and interpret

data, and use engineering judgment to draw conclusions.

8. The knowledge and application of basic science, advanced mathematics including

multivariate calculus and differential equations, and principles of engineering; to model,

analyze, design and realize physical systems, components, or processes.

9. The knowledge in either thermal or mechanical systems to work in these areas

professionally.

Academic Year

Outcome 17-18 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23

1 X X X

2 X X X

3 X X x

4 X X X

5 X X X

6 X X X

7 X X

8 X X

9 x x

3. Do you use both direct and indirect measures of learning in assessing your student outcomes?

(Direct measures of learning are assessments that measure something the student has

demonstrated, such as a specific test question or group of questions, completion of an

assignment or project, or other learning artifact. Indirect assessments are aggregated

assessments, such as grades in a course that addresses the student outcome, or they may

measure the perception of a student’s skill in attaining an outcome such as improving attitudes

about a subject or increasing understanding of a specific field.)

Yes

4. Have you mapped each student outcome to specific courses or extracurricular activities?

Yes

Student Learning Outcome Assessment Results: (Assessment is the process of quantifying what

students know, understand or can demonstrate. It is a framework for collecting data and other

documentation that the students have acquired knowledge, skills and attitudes through the

implementation of effective teaching.)

Four metrics are used to measure attainment of the SOs:

• Course Work (CW) – specific work in a class or the overall final grade in a given class.

• Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) exam results.

• Educational Testing Service (ETS) exam results.

• Graduate Exit Survey (GES).

Also, each SO is broken into measurable PIs and the metrics are used to assess attainment of the PIs.

The below table shows the PIs and associated metrics. For example, SO 3 is broken into two PIs: a)

“Written communication” which is assessed using CW and ETS metrics; and b) “Oral communication”

which is assessed using a CW metric.

Each combination of PI and metric has an expected level-of-attainment as defined in the table below.

For example, SO 3 uses CW as a metric for assessment. If student work averages between 75% to 90%,

this is assessed as “meeting the target.” The FE Exam applies the commonly-used measurement of the

“ratio score” which is the ratio average grade on a specific component of the FE exam for Montana Tech

students versus the national average.

A full cycle of SOs assessment and evaluation was conducted in 2018-19 based upon metrics collected in

2017-18. The following tables are the results of the assessment and evaluation.

SO 1 assessment and evaluation results:

Section 3: Student Learning Outcomes Evaluation (Evaluation is an opportunity for you to critically

reflect on the assessment grade in the previous step, and interpret the meaning. For example, if you set

a performance target of an average grade of C or higher on a lab assignment, and the target has been

met someone in your program may note that while the average is C, that reflects lots of high scores, but

over half the students receiving a grade of C or less, which may not be acceptable. Conversely, you may

get 100% of students meeting a target, and decide that you need to increase the skill level on that target

to become more rigorous.)

1. Please describe the process by which student outcomes are evaluated. Who is involved in the

process, how frequently does this process typically take place, how did you determine your evaluation

grade?

The faculty review the assessment results and meet to discuss. They vote on the evaluation

grade for each PI and provide “actions” to be taken. See the above tables for the evaluation

results.

2. Have criteria been defined to determine when a student outcome needs to be reviewed or

revised?

Yes. See above tables.

3. Have criteria been identified to determine when additional resources or interventions need to

be implemented to ensure that students can meet the student outcomes?

Yes. This is part of the evaluation meeting. An action can be to collect more data or

different data.

4. Describe any modifications to the Student Outcomes Assessment that have been implemented

since your last evaluation was conducted.

Several actions have been recommended. They are currently being implemented.

5. Describe any new interventions that have been recommended to help increase the percentage

of students who meet the performance metric for any student objective since your last

evaluation was conducted.

Several actions have been recommended. They are currently being implemented

Student Learning Outcome Evaluation Results:

Process Improvement

1. Are there elements of the Students Outcomes Assessment that are overly burdensome to

perform or manage and need to be modified?

No

2. Please describe any weaknesses in the student outcomes assessment that need to be remedied.

See summary table above.

3. What professional development topics would be most useful to you with respect to academic

program assessment in the future?

None.

Section 4: Contributions to Mission Fulfillment (NWCCU)

1. Core Theme 1 Education and Knowledge, Objective 1 Indicator of Achievement a, identify

benchmarks and program quality metrics for recruiting, enrollment, advising, retention,

teaching, engagement, and research on the basis of evidence supplied by (where appropriate):

student satisfaction, faculty teaching evaluations, NSSE, ETS, etc.

Recruitment

Yes No

Has someone from your program attended at least one recruiting event on campus this year?

Yes

Has someone from your program provided tours or met with students who are visiting campus in an effort to recruit them?

Yes

Has someone from your program participated in an off-campus event specifically intended to recruit students (such as a college fair or a job fair)?

Yes

Has someone from your program been invited as a speaker for a career day or a panel session on careers in your field that wasn’t a specific recruiting event, but where you spoke about opportunities at Tech or in specific majors?

Yes

Does your program utilize a program-specific social media account to increase awareness of program activities and accomplishments?

Yes

Please list any other recruitment activities in which someone from your department has

participated this year.

FVCC, Tech days, IEEE local meeting

Overall, were events organized by the recruiting office a good use of your time? Are there ways

to increase the effectiveness?

Tech days is a good use of our time. Our one on one potential student to faculty meetings are

useful.

In the future, what ways you would want to be more involved in recruitment events on campus?

We would want to help make promotional commercials for our department as well as talk with

the students on why they should come to Montana Tech for Mechanical Engineering.

Advising

Percent of program faculty who engage in face-to-face advising

Yes No

Based on the information provided by the Director of Institutional Research:

Did the percent of students registering during priority registration support your program goals?

Yes

Did the percent of faculty submitting 20th and 40th day grades support your program goals?

Yes

Are the ACE hours posted somewhere in your department where students can easily find them?

No

Have you posted contact information for the Dean of Students and Counseling Services somewhere in your department where students can easily find them?

No

Please share any plans you have to increase participation in these activities or use these to

increase retention in your program.

We actively meet with students who are receiving a non-passing grade to go over the reasons

why and to determine a plan to obtain better grades using the above options and good study

habits.

Enrollment

Yes No

Have you reviewed your enrollment trends? Yes

Have you reviewed completion rates for your department? (How many students withdrew during the semester?)

Yes

Have you reviewed courses in your department with low completion rates? Yes

Does your department sponsor a discipline-specific student organization or other co-curricular activities?

Yes

Given the current resources in your department, what is your enrollment capacity?

175

What are your plans to increase or stabilize enrollment in your department?

Hire more faculty.

What are your plans to increase within-semester completion rates? Are there specific courses

that need intervention, or are there additional services required?

Students sign up for the professional electives and are not expecting the amount of challenging

material. Expectations of students should be updated.

Retention

Yes No

During your program review, did you discuss

Fall-to-spring retention rates within your program? Yes

Fall-to-fall retention rates within your program? Yes

Graduation Rates within your program? Yes

The Student Satisfaction Inventory within your program? Yes

Describe any revisions, curricular changes, or interventions designed to improve retention rates

within your program.

We added four free electives, which allows students to have more flexibility with financial aid if

they are behind in pre-requisites.

Teaching

Yes No

Has someone from your academic program participated in at least one professional development activity focused on improving teaching?

Yes

On Campus? Off Campus? Online? Teaching Circle?

Has someone from your academic program offered at least one event or activity related to improving teaching?

No

Has someone from your academic program been the recipient of a Rose and Anna Bush Award(s) and/or a Merit Award(s)?

Yes

What evidence do you have for high quality teaching within your program?

Our feedback from our IAB and companies who hired our students indicates high quality

teaching. Our faculty members are regularly awarded high marks on course evaluations.

What steps are you taking to improve teaching in your department?

Data collection, assessment, and action are embedded in our ABET continuous

improvement process. Yearly, we solicit feedback from our IAB to identify any

weaknesses in the teaching quality within our program. Faculty are required to consider

student evaluation and make appropriate quality improvements.

What types of professional development have you found most useful?

Membership in American Society for Engineering Education is useful, as well as review

and implementation of their online resources for improved education methods.

Engagement

Yes No

Has at least one person in your program been on a college-wide committee this year?

Yes

Has at least one person in your program been on a university-wide committee this year?

Yes

Has at least one person in your program been on a state-wide committee this year?

No

Has at least one person in your program been involved in a national board or committee this year?

Yes

Research

Yes No

Has at least one person in your program presented their research at an external conference this year?

Yes

Has at least one person in your program published in a peer reviewed journal this year?

Yes

Has at least one person in your program written and submitted a grant proposal to an external funding agency this year?

Yes

Has at least one person in your program received an award related to research this year?

Yes

What percentage of those proposals were funded? N/A

What was the total amount (in dollars) awarded by external funding agencies? N/A

2. Core Theme 1 Education and Knowledge, Objective 2 Indicator of Achievement a, summarize

the educational opportunities (and participation rate) available to students in the program and

participation of graduates.

Number of Department Participants

Number of Awards

Techxpo N/A N/A

Undergraduate Research Program (URP)/ Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship (SURF)

N/A N/A

Other funded student research N/A N/A

Conference Presentations 9 1

Team Competitions 2 N/A

Internships N/A N/A

Service Learning N/A N/A

Symposia N/A N/A

Other (describe): N/A N/A

Department Name (Year)

Number of Graduates N/A

Participated in 0 of the above opportunities prior to graduation

N/A

Participated in 1 of the above opportunities prior to graduation

N/A

Participated in 2 or more of the above opportunities prior to graduation

N/A

Percent of Graduates participating in 2 or more of the above opportunities prior to graduation

N/A

3. Core Theme 2 Student Achievement, Objective 2, Indicator of Achievement d, Percent of

graduates passing standardized professional exams (i.e. ETS, NCLEX, EIT, etc.)

a. If there are no standardized professional exams for the program, respond with NA.

N/A – No data for Mechanical Engineering.

4. Core Theme 3 Engaged Faculty

N Number Reviewed for Teaching

Number Meeting Standards for Teaching

Number Reviewed for Research

Number Meeting Standards for Research

Number Reviewed for Service

Number Meeting Standards for Service

Full Time Tenure Track Faculty 6 6 6 5 5 6 6

Full Time Non Tenure Track Faculty 1 1 1 N/A N/A 1 1

Part Time Faculty 4 4 4 N/A N/A 2 2

Total 11 11 11 5 5 9 9

the mission of the mechanical engineering department at

Documents